APBA single engine program for Super Cat??
02-21-2003, 05:28 PM
#81
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 3,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by T2x
Since we're all just "brainstorming" before the "Spinning Koolaid" is passed out..................................... Please consider the following:
1. Super Cat is a great premier class but needs some tweaking. Specifically the reduction in speed from the old Open class (150 +) to today (115-120) was an over correction. The class is now too slow, and, more importantly, has no throttle response. This needs to be an 850 hp class with some punch in the mid range.
And before the whining starts....it'll be safer too....at least you can power AWAY from an accident.
Since we're all just "brainstorming" before the "Spinning Koolaid" is passed out..................................... Please consider the following:
1. Super Cat is a great premier class but needs some tweaking. Specifically the reduction in speed from the old Open class (150 +) to today (115-120) was an over correction. The class is now too slow, and, more importantly, has no throttle response. This needs to be an 850 hp class with some punch in the mid range.
And before the whining starts....it'll be safer too....at least you can power AWAY from an accident.
02-21-2003, 05:28 PM
#82
www.weismann.net
Gold Member
From what I hear Sterling got the call. Good for Mike. Bad for Baker,Koury,Ilmore,Phaff,Teague,ect......... Is this good for the sport? What are they going to do after spending all that time and effort and RND?All these people sent there staff and families to the races. That will be gone.
I am not a registered racer but I am a manufacturer that has already had to deal with this type of ruling.
Cost on a multispeed is not that high and would be cheaper by now if we were allowed to race it. Developing a product is much quicker when there is a racing deadline. Cost is not why it was banned. Reliability is not why it was banned. Why was it Banned?
Competition breeds innovation and speed. If you do not allow small companies to play the game the end result is in 50 years you will still be talking about you how much it cost you to fix your pleasure boat after a weekend of boating.
pat W
I am not a registered racer but I am a manufacturer that has already had to deal with this type of ruling.
Cost on a multispeed is not that high and would be cheaper by now if we were allowed to race it. Developing a product is much quicker when there is a racing deadline. Cost is not why it was banned. Reliability is not why it was banned. Why was it Banned?
Competition breeds innovation and speed. If you do not allow small companies to play the game the end result is in 50 years you will still be talking about you how much it cost you to fix your pleasure boat after a weekend of boating.
pat W
Last edited by shifter; 02-22-2003 at 01:08 AM.
02-21-2003, 06:04 PM
#83
LOOK AT THE LEAD NOW!!!!!
Platinum Member
I have heard over the years many people stating that Transmissions such as the ones that Pat W. manufactures are a good idea for the sport. Being able to down shift to another gear helps for better acceleration in the turns. If my memory serves me correct these types of transmissions are used in the UIM Class 1 category. I remember an article written years ago about how Laith Pharon and John Tomlinson were running these transmission in Open Class and felt they were good in a safety aspect also being able to down shift and have the power to come out of a turn where boats without them would spin and roll.
Just adding some input, not trying to stir anything. Pat W. am I correct with this????
Just adding some input, not trying to stir anything. Pat W. am I correct with this????
02-21-2003, 06:24 PM
#84
Registered
Platinum Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cincinnati
Posts: 2,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DPT, I feel you are correct, but it is another expense, and one team would use them and all the others would have to switch to be competitive.
We as a mfg have been in the same shoes and it is not a great place to be. We certainly understand the frustration, but also see the other side.
We as a mfg have been in the same shoes and it is not a great place to be. We certainly understand the frustration, but also see the other side.
02-21-2003, 06:36 PM
#85
LOOK AT THE LEAD NOW!!!!!
Platinum Member
Chris,
I agree with you totally. But know you have guys that have spent lots of money wih other builders who have to throw all that R&D out from there engine programs and switch a single engine builder. I am not saying to do it right away, cause having to go to a new motor builder and buying transmissions would be a great expense all at once. It would be a good rule change once everyone gets settled in with the new engine program.
Question I have is if the Motor for the class is gonna remain the same or is it gonna put out more HP and Torque?????
I agree with you totally. But know you have guys that have spent lots of money wih other builders who have to throw all that R&D out from there engine programs and switch a single engine builder. I am not saying to do it right away, cause having to go to a new motor builder and buying transmissions would be a great expense all at once. It would be a good rule change once everyone gets settled in with the new engine program.
Question I have is if the Motor for the class is gonna remain the same or is it gonna put out more HP and Torque?????
02-21-2003, 06:41 PM
#86
LOOK AT THE LEAD NOW!!!!!
Platinum Member
I can also see this whole thing being bad for other teams also. Hopeing I am wrong but you may see some Teams drop out of Supercat with this new ruling once it is inforced.
Let's face it there is no return on $$$s when it comes to boat racing. Never has been and frankly if there is a bigger return in the future it will not offset any of the money spent to race or to be competitive for that matter.
Let's face it there is no return on $$$s when it comes to boat racing. Never has been and frankly if there is a bigger return in the future it will not offset any of the money spent to race or to be competitive for that matter.
02-21-2003, 06:46 PM
#87
Racer
Racer
Well MAYBE just MAYBE it WILL be better for the racers. Could it possibly be that Sterling offerd the LOWEST prices to THE RACERS not the highest BID....................???????
02-21-2003, 06:51 PM
#88
LOOK AT THE LEAD NOW!!!!!
Platinum Member
Ryan,
Please don't take anything that I have stated in a bad way. I think that more parity is a good thing. It just gets tough for guys with not so big budgets in the class to become top competitors right away.
Mike D. is a great guy and builds probably some of the best motors on the market and I congatulate him and the rest of the Sterling Company for getting the contract. I have no doudt in my mind that he will be able to fullfil the role.
Please don't take anything that I have stated in a bad way. I think that more parity is a good thing. It just gets tough for guys with not so big budgets in the class to become top competitors right away.
Mike D. is a great guy and builds probably some of the best motors on the market and I congatulate him and the rest of the Sterling Company for getting the contract. I have no doudt in my mind that he will be able to fullfil the role.
02-21-2003, 06:59 PM
#89
Racer
Racer
Dennis
I was asking a question hopefully Sterling got the contract because they are offering the best price to the racers, do you follow me? There were really only two choices of the current engine builder that could possibly meet the demand and that have the track record to back it up. I was honestly surprised that it was not Mercury though.
I was asking a question hopefully Sterling got the contract because they are offering the best price to the racers, do you follow me? There were really only two choices of the current engine builder that could possibly meet the demand and that have the track record to back it up. I was honestly surprised that it was not Mercury though.
02-21-2003, 07:06 PM
#90
LOOK AT THE LEAD NOW!!!!!
Platinum Member
Ok, got ya Ryan. Sorry about that. I am sure we will see a statement about it some where soon. Someone stated that Sterling got it, I think it was Shane B. from this board. If his statement is correct I don't know, Would sure like to know if it was true.
Do you understand my other points about teams that have already spent alot of $$$s on motors from other builders. I am actually refering to a friend of yours and mine. Just doesn't seem fair thats all.
Do you understand my other points about teams that have already spent alot of $$$s on motors from other builders. I am actually refering to a friend of yours and mine. Just doesn't seem fair thats all.
